Revision summary
Dams, mines, and productivist farming have been masculinist and often Western-technocratic. That part of the view is fair. Indian kinship patriarchy predates and partners that project. Class and caste cannot be reduced to lost feminine principles. Remedy is rights, care, and ecology, not a romance of the pre-colonial.
Model answer
Introduction
The view is partly right as a critique of a certain development model, and too simple as a full sociology of India. Large dams, mines, and Green Revolution packages did privilege control, extraction, and male property. India also has its own Seed-and-Earth patriarchy that did not wait for the West.
Body
Where I agree
- Colonial and Nehruvian high modernism treated nature and village as resources to command, a masculine engineer ethic.
- Displacement in Narmada-type projects drowned feminine-coded commons: grove, water, seed diversity.
- Formal jobs and the 1991 office often copied a Western male breadwinner while dumping care on women.
- Ecofeminist readings of Chipko and similar struggles name this well.
Where I disagree or qualify
- Leela Dube’s Seed and Earth is an Indian kinship patriarchy, not a Western import.
- Champaran peasants fought a colonial planter; the gender order of the peasant household was still local.
- A. R. Desai’s class path explains surplus and the state without reducing all of it to ‘the West’.
- Dalit and Adivasi women face caste and tribal patriarchies that a single ‘Western feminine principle’ misses.
- Women’s movements, Me Too in 2018, and girl-education schemes are also modern, not a return to a lost goddess order.
My position
- Agree that development has been patriarchal and often Western-technocratic.
- Do not agree that surrendering ‘feminine principles’ is the whole project, or that the remedy is a romantic pre-colonial feminine.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD DV[Development project] --> MS[Masculinist extraction] WS[Western technocracy] --> MS SE[Indian Seed Earth] --> MS EF[Ecofeminist critique] --> MS CST[Caste class] --> Q[Qualify the view]
Conclusion
- I partly agree: India’s development project has often been a masculinist, Western-styled conquest of land and care. I do not agree that indigenous patriarchy is innocent, or that feminine principle language can replace class, caste, and constitutional equality as the full critique.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Assess the impact of ban on 'Triple Talak' on marriage and divorce among the Muslim community in India.
Next question in the 2018 paper (Q8). View answer →
-
Is the Green Revolution Western patriarchy?
It was a technocratic package that strengthened male landholders. Local caste power used it.
-
Does disagreement mean defending current development?
No. It means the critique needs caste, class, and Indian patriarchy too.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2020 · Q4(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Discuss the conceptual issues about lineage and descent in India. Give suitable illustrations , -
2020 · Q4(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Analyze household dimensions of family in India. -
2018 · Q3(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Illustrate the importance of 'Kanyadaan' and 'Kulavadhu' in changing institution of marriage and family. -
2018 · Q8(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Assess the impact of ban on 'Triple Talak' on marriage and divorce among the Muslim community in India. -
2017 · Q3(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Clarify the distinction between "household" and "family" and evaluate Whether joint families have completely disintegrated -
2016 · Q3(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Bring out the significance of the difference between family and household. -
2016 · Q7(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Examine the impact of industrialization and urbanization on family structure. -
2015 · Q2(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Broadly compare the kinship system of North and South India.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2018 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Write a note on G.S.Ghurye's Indological perspective of understanding Indian society.
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
Ghurye’s Indological perspective reads India through texts and Hindu civilisation. Caste and Race listed structural features and rejected a crude race theory. Tribe was treated as a backward Hindu awaiting assimilation. Field sociologists showed living rank and power that books do not fix. Class and minority self-rule further limit the method.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2018 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Give a critical analysis of Andre Beteille's study of Tanjore village.
Caste System
Sripuram split caste, class, and power in a Tanjore village. Land reform and democracy made the structure disharmonic. The study corrected harmony functionalism and a fused sacred hierarchy. Limits are Brahmin-centred fieldwork, thin gender, and one-village scale. Use it as a method, not as all of India.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2018 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Media is the fourth pillar of democracy. Discuss.
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
The fourth-pillar claim is that media watches the three official organs. Speech rights and investigative reporting sometimes fulfil it. Ownership, paid news, and communal frames weaken it. Women, caste, and rural poor are unevenly seen. The phrase is an ideal to enforce, not a fact already achieved.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.